Ben Shapiro: 7 Myths of Democratic Socialism Debunked

Fullauto223cal's picture

Ben Shapiro: 7 Myths of Democratic Socialism Debunked

Benjamin (Ben) Shapiro is an American conservative political commentator, nationally syndicated columnist, author, radio talk show host, and attorney. He is editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com, and host of "The Ben Shapiro Show.

1.857145
Average: 1.9 (7 votes)

Comments

sato's picture

he's certainly a clever guy, using linguistic tricks and logical fallacies to convince the gullible that what is false is actually true. would make a great lawyer.

1. just because a few people didn't give a definition doesn't mean there isn't one, and that faulty logic doesn't mean that therefore democratic socialism is just the same as socialism.

2. north korea calling itself a republic has nothing to do with democratic socialism. he then uses the same trick, using the point he just failed to establish as if it were fact. no-one is advocating any force (just as canada's social healthcare system is optional), yet he pretends this is fact.

3. just a plain false claim. bernie sanders (and others) have shown hot only his proposed solutions but how they have already worked in other countries that have already implemented them. he also never advocated nationalising everything (or even most things), so again he's just straight out lying here.

 

ok from there it's harder to break down one by one because he throws false equivalencies and other plainer mis-truths around like anything. he says rich can't steal from poor because the poor don't have money, deliberately avoiding the reason those people are poor despite working 60 hour weeks. no-one is saying people should be limited to only a few houses, no-one is saying the rich should have their stuff confiscated and given to the poor. all his arguments are based on the perceived outcomes of what absolutely nobody is advocating for. i guess we really need him in the tough fight with all those straw men he's talking about?

 

in case this is still unclear, here's a more straightforward example of the trick he's using:

gun owners want to kill everyone. that's murder, which is bad, so we should ban guns.

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

He was a lawyer, then he became the Evangelical Whisperer

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

more like a jewish whisperer.....

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
trooper_trent's picture

What's the difference between Democratic Socialism and Socialism?

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

the hint is in the name. it's to achieve socialist goals but within a democratic system. social healthcare is a good example and easy to understand, and many democratic countries have it already. the government creates a healthcare and insurance system, and the private sector also sells healthcare and insurance for anyone that wants it. what usually happens is the government healthcare becomes like the "bronze" package, and "gold" and "silver" packages are available from private companies. the goal of universal healthcare is accomplished, but democratically. the social system keeps costs low and quality high by setting a minimum. currently in the US for-profit healthcare only has to be better than nothing, whereas with social healthcare as on option (not forced like shapiro falsely claims), private companies have to compete and offer reasonable alternatives.

in general it's about allowing freedom while also making it so that people can't get so much that it impinges on others' freedoms. take fishing for example. under socialism it would be everyone must catch one fish and only one fish, whereas democratic socialists would say you can catch as many as you like but not so many that there's none left for anyone else to catch. it rejects authoritan government, and instead favors reasonable restrictions so that everyone who wants to proper can do so, without being kept down by the government as in socialism, but also without being kept down by things like monopolies which are permitted under unbound capitalism.

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid's picture

Doesn't the Democratic Socialist party of America support the abolishment of profit, or is that fake news?

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

i dunno there might be a new party of people calling themselves the democratic socialist party who do want to abolish profit, either of people who really do want that or set up to try to discredit the actual democratic socialists who don't want it and have never said anything of the sort. the establishment democratic party members have been losing a lot of ground to social democrats, so it wouldn't surprise me if they set something up to give weight to counter-arguments. also there seems to be a lot of variation in the definition, so this could be a legitimate group that differs in policy from the current progressive wave, yet still calls themselves democratic socialists.

 

hmm, upon further research i've discovered i was wrong to use the terms "social democrat" and "democratic socialist" interchangeably. seems they're two quite similar sets of ideas, but differ in a few key foundations. anyway, what i'm talking about generally in all these comments are "the bernie people".

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid's picture

The reason I asked is because I've noticed there are two types of people talking about Democratic socialism. There are the people who say everything you said and want a Bernie like solution which would be a solution that brings the US more in the direction towards Canada. And then there are the people who say everything you say and explicitly leave out the fact that they want to abolish profit which essentially makes them communist. 

I have heard that some of these organizations that appear to support extreme positions are actually strawman constructs designed to discredit a more reasonable version.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
dannyrondeau's picture

I don't know why you would say that canadian healthcare is optional. It is not. I am canadian. The provincial healthcare system is mandatory. The premiums must be paid and never are forgiven unless you prove poverty. If you are deemed able to pay and don't, the province will garnishee your wages. I joined Spiked just to reply to you because your claim is incorrect. If a canadian opts out, it only lasts 1year. If you forget to renew your opt out after that time, you are automatically reenrolled at whivwhich point the bills start rolling in again. it's NOT optional, and it's NOT FREE. 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid's picture

This is all correct. Now that you have an account you should stay and post. The most frequent thing I hear from Americans longing for Canadian health care is that you shouldn't have to go bankrupt because you got sick. In Canada you can easily go bankrupt and remain quite sick. I worked for 26 years straight and put hundreds of thousands into the health care system, and when I needed it to work for me it was shockingly bad. I found out that everyone knows that you're just supposed to say Canadian health care is great to shame Americans, but if you actually get sick you go pay a real doctor to treat you silly rabbit. Learning how hypocrisy has been embedded into a corrupt social fabric has been difficult for me.

 

Going  bankrupt but receiving swift, competent treatment that saves your life or years of suffering is well, well worth it. Stick with "cured but bankrupt" - stick with that every time.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

in what way was it shockingly bad?

i'm surprised you had to pay so much. in australia someone making $100,000 a year pays only $1500 to the public healthcare system. in that high bracket even after 50 years of income it's only $75,000 for a lifetime of cover.

you're also underestimating the cost of the american healthcare system. you put hundreds of thousands in over 26 years, that's what a single hospitalization costs in america.

you can't go bankrupt but receive swift competent treatment. as soon as you're bankrupt, the treatment ends.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Could you explain how this actually works in Canada?  If you can "opt out" it appears not to be mandatory, which sort of defeats the object.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid's picture

In some of our Western provinces there are monthly provincial premiums people have to pay to receive health care on top of the forced federal income tax that pays for it, and if you do that you cannot receive socially-funded health care until you catch up on paying those premiums. I live in Ontario, which doesn't have such premiums, so that's all I know about Alberta and BC, and things could have changed recently. No one can opt out of paying the income taxes that fund universal health care across the country - believe me I would have done that years ago were it possible.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
dannyrondeau's picture

In BC you can only opt out for 12 months at a time. The you are automatically reinstated, and you automatically owe premiums. Generally, you cannot get private insurance without also paying into provincial coverage, so no, you can't go private. I didn't say that anyone said it was free, I simply stated that as another common misconception of canadian healthcare. It's shockingly bad in the level of indifference, wait times, user fees on top of coverage premiums (yeah, hardly anything is actually covered by the monthly fees) lack of access to services, lack of doctors, lack of nurses, hell, whole hospitals shutting down  (my town of 15,000 almost lost its hospital 5 years ago. We were rallying in the streets for months.) I've lived in this town for 20 years and I kid you not I still don't have a family physician. This is common.  The average wait time in ER unless you are gushing blood (I have been) is 2 to 4 hours. I've been forgotten about in an exam room due to shift change on a weekend. People die in the Canada's all the time simply due to an underfunded and overtaxed system. And people who can't afford the premiums get shafted, especially if they are first nations or street people. It's not the picture of social justice that you imagine. Anyone who can afford to, that I know,  goes to the states to get prompt, competent, service-oriented treatment. 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

i think you misunderstand my point. you have to pay into the public healthcare system, but whether you utilize it or not is an option. you have private healthcare providers too, right? and you're free to choose to go to your own private practice rather than a public one? that's what i mean by optional. the only thing you're not free to choose is no healthcare, which is as it should be, because then everyone else ends up paying for your healthcare in the end anyway.

also i never said it was free?

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
dannyrondeau's picture

I'm referencing what I think Shapiro's point is. Most canadian health insurance is mandatory.  In fact very few people in Canada are aware that you can opt out. It's not offered. And there are hurdles like I said, you have to be on it or next thing you know you are reinstated without your consent and in debt to the system, which will garnishee your wage. It's happening to a guy I know right now. If you go to the BC medical services homepage right now, it will say "coverage is mandatory".  And like I said, nearly all private insurance won't touch you if you don't also have bc medical.  So no. It's not really optional as you are saying. It's more state enforced, as Shapiro is saying. 

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture

If no healthcare is not an option. Then you do not really have options.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Listening to this guy always makes my hair stand up. He surely was champion of the debate class. Which does not make him correct, far from it, like sato said above.

 

He cleverly uses prejudices and amplifies them in his favour. Minor research actually debunks his shit rather quickly. But,of course, to the not so intellectually talented "alt right" winger he is the new born political jesus.

+1
+3
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000's picture
Master Mind

isn't a myth already debunked?

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

Yes, but that doesn't mean brainwashed people still do not believe it.  Example: Literally ANY religion.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Following the contribution regarding canada above maybe it is time for a little comparison...

 

Now I was part of 3 different SS systems, Germany, UK and now here in Spain. 

In Germany and the UK health care and pension are separate, in spain they come together.

 

In Germany you can opt out of the SS healthcare (which again sort of defeats the object) and get your own private insurance, which initially is way cheaper but as soon as you have dependants or get older this quickly changes. You must earn above a certain threshold or be self employed in order to contract private insurance, once you have it you can't go back unless you become unemployed. Benefits are shorter waiting list and some private hospitals and single room.

 

In the UK private healthcare is usually part of the employment package and is over and on top of the SS. Some insurances have private hospitals but main benefits are single rooms and moving up the waiting list for operations.

 

Here in Spain health care and pension are one package and mandatrory, also when self employed, you can have additional private insurance. There is no opting out and it is quite expensive if you are self employed and not earning a lot, as the minimum contribution is 260€/month (for start ups there are reduced fees which increas to the minimum over 3 years time). There is no opting out but if you are unemployed you don't pay but remain covered. 

I am too old for private care but there are private hospitals and doctors all over the place. 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down